East Sac’s fight against new apartment block is exactly what NIMBYs do | Opinion
I hate to break it to you, but if you oppose new housing in your neighborhood, then you are the literal definition of a NIMBY: People who oppose proposed real estate, infrastructure or public service developments like affordable housing in their neighborhood — even if they support the concept of such facilities overall.
The war between the neighbors of East Sacramento and the city of Sacramento has been waging for months since it was announced the derelict eyesore at Alhambra Blvd. between C and D streets which was previously a bakery will be demolished to build a 332-unit apartment complex, in a central location of the city with easy access to public transportation and amenities.
The main arguments? It’s too tall. It’s too much traffic. It’s too many people.
Wah wah wah. What a bunch of NIMBYs.
Everyone knows California is in desperate need of new housing, and Sacramento alone need to build nearly 45,000 new units to keep up with market demand. That means everyone must play their part in building it and accepting it into their neighborhoods. If that means tearing up old special planning district agreements and zoning rules that were made decades ago before we knew what needed to be done, so be it.
You say that at 68 feet in places, the project is too tall for the neighborhood’s 35-foot zoning limit that will “preserve the charm” of East Sac? I assure you, the charm of East Sac is being tarnished much more by residents seeking exclusivity than by the height of its buildings.
You say the city didn’t listen to your concerns? It certainly did, in a marathon, hours-long public comment period. It just disagreed with you.
If residents in opposition to the project feel like they’re being made out as villains, standing in the way of solving California’s housing crisis, that’s because they are.
I don’t say this blindly: I’m a homeowner in the city, too. And if I’ve learned anything in the first four years of owning my home, it’s to expect change. No homeowner is entitled to a neighborhood that will look the same year to year — much less from decade to decade.
So forgive me if I find it hard not to roll my eyes at homeowners in East Sac who lean on their supposed credentials of having lived there for 20, 30 or even 40-plus years as some sort of explanation for obstinacy and stagnation.
I do, however, find it deliciously ironic that East Sac’s sweetheart city council member, Phil Pluckebaum, is now at the center of the neighborhood’s ire.
Pluckebaum, you might remember, was elected as a more conservative replacement to Katie Valenzuela, but is now being blamed for being too in the pockets of developers — as though his connections to the business and developer community wasn’t a massive selling point for voters in East Sacramento in 2024.
The Sacramento City Council, for all its many issues, has succeeded at least in this: Our city is becoming one of the most progressive housing development areas in the state. We are growing, and with that comes some pains, but it also brings economic prosperity and a thriving community.
And since it was approved in April, the project is unlikely to be stalled in the courts by residential opposition, thanks to 2025’s Assembly Bill 130 by Asm. Buffy Wicks, D-Oakland. The legislation exempts important infill projects like this from CEQA, and codifies the rules surrounding acceptance of housing projects by local councils — specifically that cities cannot reject housing that meets all of the city’s planning criteria.
The new law may help to explain why every Sacramento City Council member voted “Yes,” and how progressive local officials and progressive state legislation are making Sacramento a leader in urban renewal.
The apartment complex on Alhambra Boulevard is what urban infill housing in California looks like. Get on board or get left behind.
